Awesome New Mike Love Article!!

[Emily]

I will say that while I agree that Mike Love's and very possibly other Beach Boys' attitudes, even if subtle, seem to have contributed to Brian Wilson's shifting thoughts about his Smile work, I also think it's hard to take statements by Brian Wilson as clear or definitive. He seems often to speak in metaphor and non sequitur and often is self-contradictory. I'm going to assume, and hope, that his autobiography is done with more deliberation and intentional clarity than many of his interviews.

[CenturyDeprived]

My favorite radio station had a theme week just now with reports and discussions on the subject of how social media and internet forums incite hate and radicalisation. They say the reason is that hate needs approval and community, and that's what the internet offers. You can witness that right in this thread. People have formed their radicalised opinion and emphasize on quotes and facts that weigh in for their own point of view, and other people who try to have a more balanced point of view are shouted down.

Micha, in my opinion, your post ^ is the most important post of the last five years, and easily the relevant one as it pertains to this board. Thread topics aren't even important anymore; they are just a front or an EXCUSE to incite more hate. I'll tell you what, even though I believe it IS hate, so some aren't offended, I'll scratch that and instead substitute attack, destroy, or avenge.

The thread topics offer very little in the area of new information. This new information could easily be discussed and if necessary, debated, in a couple of pages. Instead, some posters will take a sentence, hell, even a single phrase, and turn it into an entirely different "case" - based on a single phrase! And, if there isn't enough ammo in the new topic, by God we'll go back several years and we'll find another case and enter THAT into the discussion. Take that, Mike! Fun isn't it? No, it's sad, actually. What's even sadder is when some brave souls offer a different side or perspective - and there are (at least) two sides to every story - and they are the ones accused of trolling. Unbelievable...

But, it's OK to attack Mike, over and over and over, because, well, that's what Mike is doing to Brian, right? As long as Mike keeps complaining, it's OK to "give it right back" to him because he deserves it. As long as Mike keeps saying these bad things about Brian (and others), and with his overall whining and repeating, he deserves to be hammered for it! So, therefore, it's OK for us to, in turn, do the same thing - that is, say derogatory things about Mike and whine and repeat bad things about HIM. What's that called, when one criticizes somebody for doing/saying something, and then one proceeds to do the same thing?

But, I guess it's all good. I mean, look at how long these threads are running. There's never enough pages or opportunities to attack a Beach Boy, especially when they deserve it. And, the moderators are allowing it, so it must be OK...

Ah yes, at last, the voice of reason.  And thank heavens you never say anything that is inflammatory, nor attack Brian, nor Billy C for that matter.  I invite everyone to look at your post history and see how balanced and reasonable you have been.

Actually, this thread was an interesting discussion of documented legal material and the related statements to what what was asked in the RS article by Mr. Love.  Then there was the TV film that seemed to have the same characterizations of the Wilsons as the later 2005-2010 lawsuit.  We were essentially quoting Mr. Love.  So where is all this "hate" you're referencing exactly?

Debbie is right on.

While some people on this board do just "attack" Mike blatantly without any empathy for his side, without recognizing where his head space may have been at the time of a discussed event... other people such as myself go out of our way to have a broadened view, to specifically mention a very real empathy for Mike and some very legit cr*p that he has gone through. I'm not sure who SJS is referencing, but he's about the last guy to have the chutzpah to make that kind of statement.

A large amount of Mike's interviews get picked apart due to his apparent lack of showing any perceptible understanding of Brian's point of view. I think that many of us, while admittedly critical of many of Mike's interviews, will go out of our way to show more of a balanced understanding and empathy for both sides of the equation, compared to whatever "balance" Mike shows in interviews himself. While some posters can get out of hand sometimes due to venting over what we view as gross inaccuracies (that truly touch a nerve when it comes to what we believe is utter falsehoods and rewriting history), lumping all Mike criticism together is ridiculous because much of it is nevertheless still quite empathetic to him.

[SMiLE Brian]

If you imagine Mike Love is posting as SJS, his posts make sense on why they are so bitter and angry.

[CenturyDeprived]

I will say that while I agree that Mike Love's and very possibly other Beach Boys' attitudes, even if subtle, seem to have contributed to Brian Wilson's shifting thoughts about his Smile work, I also think it's hard to take statements by Brian Wilson as clear or definitive. He seems often to speak in metaphor and non sequitur and often is self-contradictory. I'm going to assume, and hope, that his autobiography is done with more deliberation and intentional clarity than many of his interviews.

I think the unfortunate aspect of Brian speaking in contradictory fashion, brushing things off in a laughing manner (ie) the Heroes & Villains nuclear bomb audio, etc. has made Mike not think that he himself ever caused damage to Brian. Maybe Brian learned that behavior from enduring alpha male crap from Murry, and just laughably brushed off things that deeply pierced him, so as to not actually have to deal with the issues or behaviors at hand. I think Mike’s perception got warped from Brian not being upfront and honest about how Mike made him feel. It’s nobody’s fault (or it’s both of their fault), but mostly it’s just tragic. At least Brian seems to be trying to break that cycle. Mike seems to be trying a little, but IMO not nearly hard enough.

[Emily]

I will say that while I agree that Mike Love's and very possibly other Beach Boys' attitudes, even if subtle, seem to have contributed to Brian Wilson's shifting thoughts about his Smile work, I also think it's hard to take statements by Brian Wilson as clear or definitive. He seems often to speak in metaphor and non sequitur and often is self-contradictory. I'm going to assume, and hope, that his autobiography is done with more deliberation and intentional clarity than many of his interviews.

I think the unfortunate aspect of Brian speaking in contradictory fashion, brushing things off in a laughing manner (ie) the Heroes & Villains nuclear bomb audio, etc. has made Mike not think that he himself ever caused damage to Brian. Maybe Brian learned that behavior from enduring alpha male crap from Murry, and just laughably brushed off things that deeply pierced him, so as to not actually have to deal with the issues or behaviors at hand. I think Mike’s perception got warped from Brian not being upfront and honest about how Mike made him feel. It’s nobody’s fault (or it’s both of their fault), but mostly it’s just tragic. At least Brian seems to be trying to break that cycle. Mike seems to be trying a little, but IMO not nearly hard enough.

I think that this makes sense.

[Mr. Verlander]

Regarding Brian's comments in BD; I take them with a grain of salt. Now, I'm no Mike Love "lover" by any means. I think he can be a mean spirited guy with a very dry sense of humor, and has a much higher opinion of himself than he should. However, for years, Brian chalked SMiLE's demise up to it being "inappropriate music". YEARS. Then, all of a sudden, he changes his tune. It almost feels like he said it because he heard it so much over the years, he bought into it.

I love Brian Wilson. His music has brought me to tears. There's no denying the fact though, that he can be wishy-washy. Which I think is the case in this particular thing.

[Emily]

Regarding Brian's comments in BD; I take them with a grain of salt. Now, I'm no Mike Love "lover" by any means. I think he can be a mean spirited guy with a very dry sense of humor, and has a much higher opinion of himself than he should. However, for years, Brian chalked SMiLE's demise up to it being "inappropriate music". YEARS. Then, all of a sudden, he changes his tune. It almost feels like he said it because he heard it so much over the years, he bought into it.

I love Brian Wilson. His music has brought me to tears. There's no denying the fact though, that he can be wishy-washy. Which I think is the case in this particular thing.

I agree that it's hard to be clear on anything based on Brian Wilson's statements, but I always sort of thought that he came to consider it as "inappropriate" due to input from others, which may include Mike Love.

[clack]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

[Debbie KL]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

Yeah, not exactly.  In fact an absurd summary.  Give more specifics of these constant betrayals by Brian over the years.

[CenturyDeprived]

Regarding Brian's comments in BD; I take them with a grain of salt. Now, I'm no Mike Love "lover" by any means. I think he can be a mean spirited guy with a very dry sense of humor, and has a much higher opinion of himself than he should. However, for years, Brian chalked SMiLE's demise up to it being "inappropriate music". YEARS. Then, all of a sudden, he changes his tune. It almost feels like he said it because he heard it so much over the years, he bought into it.

I love Brian Wilson. His music has brought me to tears. There's no denying the fact though, that he can be wishy-washy. Which I think is the case in this particular thing.

I agree that it's hard to be clear on anything based on Brian Wilson's statements, but I always sort of thought that he came to consider it as "inappropriate" due to input from others, which may include Mike Love.

Exactly. And you don't have a bunch (or any, as far as I know) examples of Brian ever saying "Mike didn't contribute to the downfall of Smile", and then all of a sudden just contradicting those statements in Beautiful Dreamer by including Mike as a reason.  

Nobody else, as far as I know, who was in the know at the time, OTHER than Mike himself, has made the claim that Mike had zero impact on the project's downfall.

Brian publicly omitted the Mike contributing factor reason most likely because Brian was trying to not be vindictive, and he may have been afraid to speak up honestly. He just imploded internally and wouldn't talk about it, and the easiest way to not deal with the reasons was to avoid talking about the project entirely, say it was "inappropriate", and distract himself with substances.

Face it: after Brian finally publicly voiced the truth (2004), the very next year a lawsuit was launched against him. And we're to believe that this is just a matter of chance? I think Brian has, in numerous ways, been afraid of crossing Mike for years.

Mike's a dude with ADMITTED anger management problems (only publicly admitted in 2016, though I applaud Mike for *finally* fessing up to them).  Brian's dad also had anger management problems. It makes pretty clear sense that Brian would avoid crossing alpha males with anger management problems based on his childhood. People who think Brian and Mike's relationship wasn't impacted by this are denying basic obvious logic.

[Emily]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

I think many of these things are a matter of perspective. The credits complaint was legit. But the level of accolades Mike Love would have received had he been credited is very debatable. Certainly he was out money; accolades, more iffy. To me, those aren't Gold Medal Olympian-level lyrics.
The "over and over" betrayal - I don't know of many by Brian. The only promise he reneged on that I know of is one that I don't really feel was reasonable to extract, though I think it was a weakness to make the promise on Brian's part.
I agree that it's likely that no one actually physically forced Brian Wilson to pull the plug on Smile, but I think multiple factors contributed to him making that choice and it sounds to me like Mike Love's responses to it was one of them.
To me, the "black marks" on Mike Love are the 2005 lawsuit and his repeated public criticisms of Brian Wilson. To me, the "black marks" on Brian Wilson are repeated instances of failing to stand up for himself and the credits, though the latter might actually be another instance of the former.

[Angua]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

Nonsense.  Murry cheated Mike.  It seems likely that Brian perhaps knew this but Brian's relationship with his father meant that he was unlikely to do anything about it if he did.  Further, as I have asked before, why didn't Mike notice he did not received royalties even after the sale of the catalogue?   So Mike had the opportunity to sue Murry but didn't.  He waited until Brian managed to get some compensation for the loss and then sued Brian for more than half even though his contribution was less than half.

i don't know what 'accolades' Brian cheated Mike out of.  He didn't get as many as Brian because he didn't deserve them as much as Brian.  Mike was writing average lyrics, Brian was writing exceptional music.  Mike's name was appearing on the albums as lyricist so people were aware that he was writing the lyrics.

Your statement 'Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made' - what promises?  In what other ways did he cheat him?

With regard to Smile, Mikes lack of support and rudeness to VDP seems certain to be a factor in the failing of Smile.  He felt that he had the right to do this as he was part of the group but should have had the great good sense to follow Brian's perception - after all it certainly proved to be correct and Brian's career has continued to this date because of his ability whereas Mike has a failed album and success singing the songs his cousin wrote (some of which use his lyrics) in a touring band.

Apart from the 2005 lawsuit which was thrown out of court and his horrendous claims which could have meant that Brian had no rights to perform Pet Sounds and Smile which Mike is on record as having disapproved of, there is also the acrimonious ending to the C50 and the Rock and Roll Hall of fame where Mike tried his best to upstage Brian and then shamed the whole group by a trade of abuse to virtually everyone in the record business.

[Angua]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

I think many of these things are a matter of perspective. The credits complaint was legit. But the level of accolades Mike Love would have received had he been credited is very debatable. Certainly he was out money; accolades, more iffy. To me, those aren't Gold Medal Olympian-level lyrics.
The "over and over" betrayal - I don't know of many by Brian. The only promise he reneged on that I know of is one that I don't really feel was reasonable to extract, though I think it was a weakness to make the promise on Brian's part.
I agree that it's likely that no one actually physically forced Brian Wilson to pull the plug on Smile, but I think multiple factors contributed to him making that choice and it sounds to me like Mike Love's responses to it was one of them.
To me, the "black marks" on Mike Love are the 2005 lawsuit and his repeated public criticisms of Brian Wilson. To me, the "black marks" on Brian Wilson are repeated instances of failing to stand up for himself and the credits, though the latter might actually be another instance of the former.

Emily
Brian had problems with an abusive father, a controlling doctor and a mental illness.  I don't think we can really blame him for having difficulties in dealing with confrontation bearing this in mind.

[Emily]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

I think many of these things are a matter of perspective. The credits complaint was legit. But the level of accolades Mike Love would have received had he been credited is very debatable. Certainly he was out money; accolades, more iffy. To me, those aren't Gold Medal Olympian-level lyrics.
The "over and over" betrayal - I don't know of many by Brian. The only promise he reneged on that I know of is one that I don't really feel was reasonable to extract, though I think it was a weakness to make the promise on Brian's part.
I agree that it's likely that no one actually physically forced Brian Wilson to pull the plug on Smile, but I think multiple factors contributed to him making that choice and it sounds to me like Mike Love's responses to it was one of them.
To me, the "black marks" on Mike Love are the 2005 lawsuit and his repeated public criticisms of Brian Wilson. To me, the "black marks" on Brian Wilson are repeated instances of failing to stand up for himself and the credits, though the latter might actually be another instance of the former.

Emily
Brian had problems with an abusive father, a controlling doctor and a mental illness.  I don't think we can really blame him for having difficulties in dealing with confrontation bearing this in mind.

I was just using the term 'black marks' because of the precedent, and that's why I put it in quotes. It's not a term I would have used. I don't 'blame' him for it.

[filledeplage]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

clack - I think there is one key guy, here;  Murry.  He got a twofer.  Back-in-the-day no one would dream of challenging an "elder" in the family.  Murry, whatever he was, likely played that card very well.  This guy fined them for swearing.  Pretty formidable.  And, timely recognition of your work cannot be undone.  It is like giving accolades for a 40 year old movie that no one remembers.  You get your reward and recognition, in a timely fashion.  It would seem that Murry still exercised control over these matters long after he was technically fired by the band.    

So Murry got the twofer (Brian and Mike) with a contract that was wrong from the outset because of the ages of the band members, who were writing music and lyrics.  And Murry controlled this from the grave for nearly 20 years after he was dead until Brian first sued on the contract. Murray should have faced the music and all his con-conspirators who perpetrated this fraud on the band in front of a judge.  Murry didn't get his justice, for whatever reason.  This is like the original event that keeps on giving.  The wrongdoing of the predatory adult-in-the-room.    

And, I don't think Mike sabotaged Smile, notwithstanding philosophical differences that happen in the artistic context all the time.  Everything I have read recently suggests from their statements in the Spring of 1967, that it was out of the band's control, with whatever happened.  They sung their hearts out.  You don't put your all into vocals, etc. and pull the plug on the work that your company is invested in.   JMHO      

[Theydon Bois]

Add some..... the traveling jukebox as its often referred to began after Endless Summer went huge. The guy that puts out the Endless Summer quarterly provided evidence that it was DENNIS pushing for a return to almost all of the old stuff in their live shows. Not to mention the traveling jukebox went on for years and years and if you think Dennis and Carl were not on board with it you are mistaken. They played what the crowds came to hear.

You've overstated this.  The originator of the "play more oldies" idea (not "almost all of the old stuff" as you paint it) was James William Guercio.  Yes, Dennis Wilson was the conduit for that idea, the messenger (if you will) in communicating it to the rest of the band, and by no account was he an unwilling messenger: he may well have been completely behind the idea of including more oldies.  But show me one history of the Beach Boys that credits the mid-'70s Dennis with enough authority and standing within the band to drive them in a direction they didn't want to go in.  I'll wait while you find one.

And to say that Carl was "on board" with the travelling jukebox years is to ignore the fact that he went solo in the early '80s, at least in part due to dissatisfaction with the direction of the band.  So things aren't nearly as simple as you claim.

[Robbie Mac]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

Kokomo's that way, Mike.

[Debbie KL]

Add some..... the traveling jukebox as its often referred to began after Endless Summer went huge. The guy that puts out the Endless Summer quarterly provided evidence that it was DENNIS pushing for a return to almost all of the old stuff in their live shows. Not to mention the traveling jukebox went on for years and years and if you think Dennis and Carl were not on board with it you are mistaken. They played what the crowds came to hear.

You've overstated this.  The originator of the "play more oldies" idea (not "almost all of the old stuff" as you paint it) was James William Guercio.  Yes, Dennis Wilson was the conduit for that idea, the messenger (if you will) in communicating it to the rest of the band, and by no account was he an unwilling messenger: he may well have been completely behind the idea of including more oldies.  But show me one history of the Beach Boys that credits the mid-'70s Dennis with enough authority and standing within the band to drive them in a direction they didn't want to go in.  I'll wait while you find one.

And to say that Carl was "on board" with the travelling jukebox years is to ignore the fact that he went solo in the early '80s, at least in part due to dissatisfaction with the direction of the band.  So things aren't nearly as simple as you claim.

Sadly, this speaks to what Brian was confronting in the late 60's and later, with no support from anyone in the family that I'm aware of, nor anyone with any financial control.  Maybe someone can provide evidence to the contrary.  I never saw it, but I have a somewhat limited view.

[Emily]

Add some..... the traveling jukebox as its often referred to began after Endless Summer went huge. The guy that puts out the Endless Summer quarterly provided evidence that it was DENNIS pushing for a return to almost all of the old stuff in their live shows. Not to mention the traveling jukebox went on for years and years and if you think Dennis and Carl were not on board with it you are mistaken. They played what the crowds came to hear.

You've overstated this.  The originator of the "play more oldies" idea (not "almost all of the old stuff" as you paint it) was James William Guercio.  Yes, Dennis Wilson was the conduit for that idea, the messenger (if you will) in communicating it to the rest of the band, and by no account was he an unwilling messenger: he may well have been completely behind the idea of including more oldies.  But show me one history of the Beach Boys that credits the mid-'70s Dennis with enough authority and standing within the band to drive them in a direction they didn't want to go in.  I'll wait while you find one.

And to say that Carl was "on board" with the travelling jukebox years is to ignore the fact that he went solo in the early '80s, at least in part due to dissatisfaction with the direction of the band.  So things aren't nearly as simple as you claim.

Sadly, this speaks to what Brian was confronting in the late 60's and later, with no support from anyone in the family that I'm aware of, nor anyone with any financial control.  Maybe someone can provide evidence to the contrary.  I never saw it, but I have a somewhat limited view.

Debbie, did Brian ever express frustration with the musical direction of the band at that time?

[Ang Jones]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

clack - I think there is one key guy, here;  Murry.  He got a twofer.  Back-in-the-day no one would dream of challenging an "elder" in the family.  Murry, whatever he was, likely played that card very well.  This guy fined them for swearing.  Pretty formidable.  And, timely recognition of your work cannot be undone.  It is like giving accolades for a 40 year old movie that no one remembers.  You get your reward and recognition, in a timely fashion.  It would seem that Murry still exercised control over these matters long after he was technically fired by the band.    

So Murry got the twofer (Brian and Mike) with a contract that was wrong from the outset because of the ages of the band members, who were writing music and lyrics.  And Murry controlled this from the grave for nearly 20 years after he was dead until Brian first sued on the contract. Murray should have faced the music and all his con-conspirators who perpetrated this fraud on the band in front of a judge.  Murry didn't get his justice, for whatever reason.  This is like the original event that keeps on giving.  The wrongdoing of the predatory adult-in-the-room.    

And, I don't think Mike sabotaged Smile, notwithstanding philosophical differences that happen in the artistic context all the time.  Everything I have read recently suggests from their statements in the Spring of 1967, that it was out of the band's control, with whatever happened.  They sung their hearts out.  You don't put your all into vocals, etc. and pull the plug on the work that your company is invested in.   JMHO      

Unfortunately, when Mike repeatedly moans about not getting credit, he doesn't just blame Murry.

As for SMiLE, I don't suppose the disagreements between Van Dyke Parks and Mike, which contributed to Van Dyke leaving the project, made it more likely that the album would come out. Mike isn't the sole cause of SMiLE's non release but IMO he has a share of the responsibility.

[Angua]

Brian is a sympathetic character, Mike is unsympathetic. But take the personalities out of it for the moment, and look at who has wronged who.

Brian cheated Mike out of money, and out of the accolades that Mike deserved. It is those lost accolades that pains Mike the most. Think of it as if an Olympian was cheated out of a gold medal, and then 30 years later had the medal restored to him. At that point, who notices? Who cares? The glory train has long left the station.

Brian betrayed Mike over and over, reneged on promises he had made. What black marks are on Mike's record in his dealings with Brian?

Voicing a perfectly valid opinion about a group project that had his name on it? He didn't sabotage Smile. Smile's failure was down to Brian.

The only major black mark on Mike's record is that ill-advised 2005 lawsuit. And a black mark it is, undeniably, both in the fact that it was filed in the first place, and in the statements it contained.

Still, in balance, Mike was more sinned against than sinner.

clack - I think there is one key guy, here;  Murry.  He got a twofer.  Back-in-the-day no one would dream of challenging an "elder" in the family.  Murry, whatever he was, likely played that card very well.  This guy fined them for swearing.  Pretty formidable.  And, timely recognition of your work cannot be undone.  It is like giving accolades for a 40 year old movie that no one remembers.  You get your reward and recognition, in a timely fashion.  It would seem that Murry still exercised control over these matters long after he was technically fired by the band.    

So Murry got the twofer (Brian and Mike) with a contract that was wrong from the outset because of the ages of the band members, who were writing music and lyrics.  And Murry controlled this from the grave for nearly 20 years after he was dead until Brian first sued on the contract. Murray should have faced the music and all his con-conspirators who perpetrated this fraud on the band in front of a judge.  Murry didn't get his justice, for whatever reason.  This is like the original event that keeps on giving.  The wrongdoing of the predatory adult-in-the-room.    

And, I don't think Mike sabotaged Smile, notwithstanding philosophical differences that happen in the artistic context all the time.  Everything I have read recently suggests from their statements in the Spring of 1967, that it was out of the band's control, with whatever happened.  They sung their hearts out.  You don't put your all into vocals, etc. and pull the plug on the work that your company is invested in.   JMHO      

Mike was credited with having written at least some of the lyrics on the albums - I know, I have many which date from the 1960's - so it was common knowledge Mike wrote some of the lyrics.  As I understand it Murry was the publisher for the band and used this position to not credit Mike for some of the songs for which he wrote lyrics.  I very much doubt that the average record buying public or even the music journalists at the time spent much time looking at published music and so were unlikely to know that Mike had not been credited on these documents.  I don't know full chapter and verse on this stuff and can't be bothered to spend hours checking to make sure that Mike was credited on the albums for every single track he says he contributed to (and his claim over California Girls lyrics alone have changed in the last 2 weeks) but surely if Mike had not been credited he would have noticed.  However he was credited on the albums for at least some of what he did and as people knew he was the lyricist I think any recognition he was due, he had.  The fact that recognition was not as great as that afforded Brian seems likely to me that it was proportional to his skill.  

I don't know how Murry could have controlled them from beyond the grave especially as he sold the catalogue in 1969 before his death in 1973.  (You'd have thought that Mike would have noticed then that he didn't get paid enough.)  A good deal of ill feeling Mike has toward Brian (according to Mike in this very same interview) is due to Brian allowing Murry to get away with this fraud but if, as you say, you did not challenge an elder at that time it is not realistic to expect Brian to and consequently seems unlikely to be the reason Mike did nothing.  So Mike's failure to do anything until after Brian was awarded damages in the 1990's, when we are talking about songs written during the period 1961 to 1969,  seems a little puzzling.

FDP you say that 'everything you have read recently suggests from their statements in the Spring of 1967, that it was out of the band's control, with whatever happened'.  It seems then that you didn't read the long debate on this subject here.  Suffice to say that at that time the band was not in control, Brian was the producer and so this could not have been the reason.  The Beach Boys were first attributed producer status on Smiley Smile.

I get really tired of all this.  There is a long discussion where people more intelligent and knowledgeable than me, quote chapter and verse and finally when it appears the reality is in sight, someone posts something which takes us right back to the beginning again. Clack, I suggest that you go back and read the previous 38 pages rather than going through it all again.

[AndrewHickey]

Mike was credited with having written at least some of the lyrics on the albums - I know, I have many which date from the 1960's - so it was common knowledge Mike wrote some of the lyrics.

Some. By the credits on the albums before Pet Sounds, Mike would have been the fourth most prominent lyricist for the band, after Brian, Gary Usher, and Roger Christian. In fact, assuming the revised credits are true, he wrote more than any of them.

 As I understand it Murry was the publisher for the band and used this position to not credit Mike for some of the songs for which he wrote lyrics.

Not just some. The vast majority. I listed earlier in this thread all the songs for which Mike was credited up to Pet Sounds. I think there were sixteen in total (can't be bothered to go back and check, but it was something like that). There were thirty-four songs in the lawsuit, and Mike's also claimed he wrote most of the lyrics to Surfin' USA (which presumably wasn't in the lawsuit because Chuck Berry won sole credit for the song because it was plagiarised from Sweet Little Sixteen).

(And Mike talks about Good Vibrations a lot, which he *was* credited for, as an example where he didn't get proper credit -- I'm not sure what's going on there...)

 I very much doubt that the average record buying public or even the music journalists at the time spent much time looking at published music and so were unlikely to know that Mike had not been credited on these documents.  I don't know full chapter and verse on this stuff and can't be bothered to spend hours checking to make sure that Mike was credited on the albums for every single track he says he contributed to (and his claim over California Girls lyrics alone have changed in the last 2 weeks) but surely if Mike had not been credited he would have noticed.

He wasn't credited on those songs on the albums either.

 However he was credited on the albums for at least some of what he did and as people knew he was the lyricist I think any recognition he was due, he had.  The fact that recognition was not as great as that afforded Brian seems likely to me that it was proportional to his skill.  

He was credited for about a third of what he did, so he got about a third of the recognition he was due -- and the other two thirds, along with the money, went wrongly to Brian.
It's likely he would still be regarded -- entirely correctly -- as a much lesser talent to Brian had he received the credit he was due. But it's also likely he would be held in higher regard than he currently is.

 A good deal of ill feeling Mike has toward Brian (according to Mike in this very same interview) is due to Brian allowing Murry to get away with this fraud

And Brian profiting from it -- and, if his behaviour towards Tony Asher is any guide (Asher talks about Brian claiming to have co-written lyrics which Asher wrote in full, and claiming to have written all the music on songs where Asher contributed musical ideas), colluding in it. All the songwriting royalties which were rightfully Mike's went to Brian instead.

[Cam Mott]

54:23 “Mike did not like Smile at all. He hated it. He hated it”

1:01:08 “I’ll tell you from my heart… in 1967, the reasons why I didn’t finish Smile were: Mike didn’t like it, I thought it was too experimental, I thought that the Fire tape was too scary, and I thought people wouldn’t understand where my head was at at that time. Those were the reasons.”

If that is Brian's opinion he apparently is wrong, according to Mike, he did not hate it, in fact he liked it very much except he wasn't sure he understood some of the lyrics and he wasn't sure they were right for their fans. 

Brian had the Boys' full cooperation regardless of what they thought about this or that (you hear it in the tapes) or what little explanation they got; according to Brian at the time they didn't want him to "junk" the songs he did junk, so imo it is hard to see where the Boys were a contributing factor to SMiLE being junked. If the Boys did indeed have feelings about SMiLE being too experimental and that their fans wouldn't understand it then they were in agreement with Brian's own feelings about it, not in conflict with Brian's feelings.

[Cam Mott]

He said it was his "theory".

His "theory" isn't that it's Mike Love propaganda. He doesn't state that as a theory. The only thing he points to theorizing about is specifically what part in the film he believes disturbed Brian and Melinda the most.

"My theory is that Brian and Melinda were most disturbed, apart from all the Mike Love propaganda at Brian's expense, by a scene that depicted Dennis Wilson screaming, 'You never supported me as an artist,' at his older brother. From everything I've read and everyone I've ever talked to, Dennis was the one guy -- perhaps the only guy -- who always stood by Brian."

They are both parts of his "theory".

Cam, you are wrong on this one.  Grammatically, Darian is not theorizing as to whether or not Brian and Melinda believed the film contained Mike Love propaganda any more than he was theorizing that Brian and Melinda believed there was a scene in the film with Dennis Wilson screaming, 'You never supported me as an artist'.

Your only avenue is to deny that Darian knows what he is talking about, accuse him of lying, or accuse the author of misquoting him.  The grammar of the statement as printed irrefutably supports CD on this one.  

EoL

So he was just theorizing that they were most disturbing.

As I don't think Darian was involved in TBB:AAF, he could be just plain wrong.

[Debbie KL]

54:23 “Mike did not like Smile at all. He hated it. He hated it”

1:01:08 “I’ll tell you from my heart… in 1967, the reasons why I didn’t finish Smile were: Mike didn’t like it, I thought it was too experimental, I thought that the Fire tape was too scary, and I thought people wouldn’t understand where my head was at at that time. Those were the reasons.”

If that is Brian's opinion he apparently is wrong, according to Mike, he did not hate it, in fact he liked it very much except he wasn't sure he understood some of the lyrics and he wasn't sure they were right for their fans. 

Brian had the Boys' full cooperation regardless of what they thought about this or that (you hear it in the tapes) or what little explanation they got; according to Brian at the time they didn't want him to "junk" the songs he did junk, so imo it is hard to see where the Boys were a contributing factor to SMiLE being junked. If the Boys did indeed have feelings about SMiLE being too experimental and that their fans wouldn't understand it then they were in agreement with Brian's own feelings about it, not in conflict with Brian's feelings.

Okay, so Brian's opinions are wrong because Mike, decades later, says otherwise.  How handy that many of the eyewitnesses are now dead.  So you're saying that only Mike knows and states the truth, unlike Brian.  Yeah, that 2005-2010 lawsuit is a fine example of that.